Talk:Valle de Cocora

Extraneous punctuation
Our dynamic map makers are making fantastic progress and this will be a benefit to all readers and editors.

However, right now there is a wee problem with the changed listing template introducing extraneous punctuation when it is used in-line in prose.

Eg:  now produces , complete with an extraneous full stop after the name. --W. Franke-mailtalk 15:30, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes it's an important issue. Globe-trotter (talk) 15:42, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Failed Star Nomination
This article was nominated for star status but failed to meet certain requirements. If you wish to make it a star, please address the concerns below prior to renomination:

It's a little cheeky to nominate this just an hour after writing it, but I honestly think it's ready. It would be our second Colombian star (and by extension our second South American star), and it is a another really cool, weird destination. The vast majority of the information is firsthand from late 2012, but I found some price updates by reading 2013 blog posts, making this fully up-to-date. It also makes use of our new dynamic maps functionality, and is an easy one to do, since OSM already did the hard work of identifying the four marked locations, as well as the trails themselves (helped by GPS-toting mountain climbers). The one "weakness" of the guide is that it's quite short, but I don't think there is really anything else that needs writing. As a fun (I hope) and quick read, hopefully I'll get some comments here ;) --Peter Talk 19:30, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Support. I certainly can't find anything wrong with it. My one suggestion would be to try to expand the intro, but that's not a serious enough concern for me to oppose seeing a star on this thing. PerryPlanet (talk) 19:34, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong support I'm only jealous that i didn't made it so far. jan (talk) 11:19, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The dynamic map is insufficient; it doesn't show the boundaries of the protected area, the campground icon is so close to the Acaime icon that I can't click on the latter at all (even at full zoom), and it doesn't grab me aesthetically.  I don't think this map is an example of our best work.  LtPowers (talk) 15:15, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The boundaries are left off for a reason: Valle de Cocora is more of a conceptual park, comprised of a complex patchwork of individual protected areas ("Reservas Naturales de la Sociedad Civil & Áreas de Conservación y Manejo") within the Distrito Regional de Manejo Integrado de la Cuenca Alta del Rio Quindío. That's a much bigger area than the "park" as understood in the touristic sense. See the map at bottom right this pdf. That's all of some (obscure) interest, but isn't really travel relevant, since all visits to the park are done along the paths as shown on the map, which are either fenced in from pasture or surrounded by thick enough jungle where you wouldn't want to stray. The campground and wooden gate icons are clustered like this only until Joachim fixes it (it's a temporary problem that cropped up just this week), which should be any day now. As to your general dislike of the look, I don't really know what to say other than to join the Dynamic maps Expedition and help develop a better style. They're the way of the future, señor. --Peter Talk 18:44, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The clustering problem is now fixed. --Peter Talk 22:27, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed, but there are still some overlapping elements on the map -- one of the trails overlays the name of the river at the default zoom level, and two icons overlay the word "Cocora". And the map as a whole just seems to lack something... context maybe?  It's just that looking at the map, I don't have a good feel for what I'm looking at except four points.  What's the difference between the green trail and the brown trail?  Are the POIs all there is, or does the park extend beyond in either direction?  LtPowers (talk) 01:24, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Wait until formatting has been fixed.

I'd fix the thumbnail images myself but I don't want to provoke a riot.

If readers bother to register a user name and then tailor their thumbnail sizes to their own particular preferences, I don't see it as proper formatting to then flout their expressed wishes.

Although pixel counts are easier to understand than upright factors, they adjust less well to user preferences. For example, suppose a picture contains some detail and by default is a bit too small, and you want to grow it by about 10%. Although " " and " " do the job equally well for the common case where the default width is 220 pixels, many of the users who set the default width to 300 pixels to work better with their high-resolution screens will be annoyed with " " because it will make the picture a third smaller than their preferred size. In contrast, " " will display the picture to them with a width of 330 pixels, and this is more likely to work well on their displays.

Leaving thumbnails without a designated size in pixels means that those readers who have not bothered/chosen not to change the default will see a display 220 pixels wide (170 pixels if the " " option is used). In general, it's best not to define the size of an image unless there is a good reason to do so: some users have small screens or need to configure their systems to display large text; "forced" large thumbnails can leave little width for text, making reading difficult. In addition, forcing a "larger" image size, at say 260px, will actually make it smaller for those with a larger size set in their user preferences.

Also, our dynamic map makers are making fantastic progress and this will be a benefit to all readers and editors.

However, right now there is a wee problem with the changed listing template introducing extraneous punctuation when it is used in-line in prose.

Eg:  now produces , complete with an extraneous full stop after the name. --W. Franke-mailtalk 16:47, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment: I'm actually not seeing the map at all, unless I click it to enlarge. In the article, I see a big white empty space. Another detail: is there a reason not to properly list Acaime as a lodging option, if they have dorm beds available? If you are indeed a hiker, it might be handy to know prices and so? Otherwise though, very nice article, looks like a great place too. JuliasTravels (talk) 13:33, 2 September 2013 (UTC)